Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24550719›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2014

Modelling individual differences in the form of Pavlovian conditioned approach responses: a dual learning systems approach with factored representations.

Florian Lesaint, Olivier Sigaud, Shelly B Flagel, Terry E Robinson, Mehdi Khamassi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Phasic dopamine encodes persistent attraction to reward cues.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  3. Modulation of Dopamine Neurons Alters Behavior and Event Encoding in the Nucleus Accumbens during Pavlovian Conditioning.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  4. Implementations of sign- and goal-tracking behavior in humans: A scoping review.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. A computational architecture of punishment insensitivity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Reward-Mediated, Model-Free Reinforcement-Learning Mechanisms in Pavlovian and Instrumental Tasks Are Related.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Mapping sign-tracking and goal-tracking onto human behaviors.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2020
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Florian LesaintInstitut des Systèmes Intelligents et de Robotique, UMR 7222, UPMC Univ Paris 06, Paris, France ; Institut des Systèmes Intelligents et de Robotique, UMR 7222, CNRS, Paris, France.
Olivier SigaudInstitut des Systèmes Intelligents et de Robotique, UMR 7222, UPMC Univ Paris 06, Paris, France ; Institut des Systèmes Intelligents et de Robotique, UMR 7222, CNRS, Paris, France.
Shelly B FlagelDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America ; Molecular and Behavioral Neuroscience Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America ; Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
Terry E RobinsonDepartment of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America.
Mehdi KhamassiInstitut des Systèmes Intelligents et de Robotique, UMR 7222, UPMC Univ Paris 06, Paris, France ; Institut des Systèmes Intelligents et de Robotique, UMR 7222, CNRS, Paris, France.

Funding

Variation in Motivational Properties of Reward Cues: Implications for AddictionP01DA031656 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI ROBINSON, TERRY E. · 2012 to 2016
$6.3M
NIDA NIH HHS P01 DA031656
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reinforcement Learning has greatly influenced models of conditioning, providing powerful explanations of acquired behaviour and underlying physiological observations. However, in recent autoshaping experiments in rats, variation in the form of Pavlovian conditioned responses (CRs) and associated dopamine activity, have questioned the classical hypothesis that phasic dopamine activity corresponds to a reward prediction error-like signal arising from a classical Model-Free system, necessary for Pavlovian conditioning. Over the course of Pavlovian conditioning using food as the unconditioned stimulus (US), some rats (sign-trackers) come to approach and engage the conditioned stimulus (CS) itself - a lever - more and more avidly, whereas other rats (goal-trackers) learn to approach the location of food delivery upon CS presentation. Importantly, although both sign-trackers and goal-trackers learn the CS-US association equally well, only in sign-trackers does phasic dopamine activity show classical reward prediction error-like bursts. Furthermore, neither the acquisition nor the expression of a goal-tracking CR is dopamine-dependent. Here we present a computational model that can account for such individual variations. We show that a combination of a Model-Based system and a revised Model-Free system can account for the development of distinct CRs in rats. Moreover, we show that revising a classical Model-Free system to individually process stimuli by using factored representations can explain why classical dopaminergic patterns may be observed for some rats and not for others depending on the CR they develop. In addition, the model can account for other behavioural and pharmacological results obtained using the same, or similar, autoshaping procedures. Finally, the model makes it possible to draw a set of experimental predictions that may be verified in a modified experimental protocol. We suggest that further investigation of factored representations in computational neuroscience studies may be useful.

Indexed as

Conditioning, PsychologicalModels, PsychologicalAlgorithmsAnimalsBehavior, AnimalBrainComputational BiologyDopamineDopamine AntagonistsFlupenthixolModels, NeurologicalRatsReinforcement, PsychologySystems BiologyDopamineDopamine AntagonistsFlupenthixol

Identifiers

PMID24550719
PMCPMC3923662

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.